Ability Grouping and Student Achievement in Elementary Schools: A Best-Evidence Synthesis

TLDR

This article reviews research on how between‑ and within‑class ability grouping affects elementary school students’ achievement. The authors use a best‑evidence synthesis, blending meta‑analytic and narrative review methods, to evaluate the studies. The synthesis finds that self‑contained ability classes have no effect, whereas cross‑grade grouping for selected subjects—especially the Joplin Plan for reading (ES + 0.45) and within‑class math (ES + 0.34)—boosts achievement, with maximal benefit when only one or two subjects are grouped, classes remain heterogeneous most of the day, groups are frequently reassessed, and instruction is differentiated.

Abstract

This article reviews research on the effects of between- and within-class ability grouping on the achievement of elementary school students. The review technique—best-evidence synthesis—combines features of meta-analytic and narrative reviews. Overall, evidence does not support assignment of students to self-contained classes according to ability (median effect size [ES] = .00), but grouping plans involving cross-grade assignment for selected subjects can increase student achievement. Research particularly supports the Joplin Plan, cross-grade ability grouping for reading only (median ES = +.45). Within-class ability grouping in mathematics is also found to be instructionally effective (median ES = +.34). Analysis of effects of alternative grouping methods suggests that ability grouping is maximally effective when done for only one or two subjects, with students remaining in heterogeneous classes most of the day; when it greatly reduces student heterogeneity in a specific skill; when group assignments are frequently reassessed; and when teachers vary the level and pace of instruction according to students’ needs.